Saving Tacoma's Urban Arbor
It’s a Catalpa tree with broad green leaves that hang over a sidewalk along North L Street near Division Avenue, providing a canopy of shade for anyone who might want to grab a burger and soft drink at Frisko Freeze, and shield themselves on a hot summer day.
It’s one of many trees in the area that date back through much of Tacoma’s history.
And like many of the city’s older trees, it sits unprotected from any number of threats: the latest development plan, or someone wanting to chop it down to clear some space or open up a view corridor.
That last facet has spurred a small group to explore the creation of a new historic register to afford some protection to the city’s heritage trees.
By now, most people are familiar with registers for historic buildings.
But historic trees? Isn’t that unusual?
“Not in the tree world,” says City of Tacoma Urban Forester Raime Pierce, who is working on a comprehensive revision to the city’s street tree ordinance that, when finished, could include a heritage tree register. “It may seem unusual to somebody who is not in the industry. But it’s becoming more and more commonplace. People are appreciating trees a lot more, and they’re more aware of the significance of larger, secure trees.”
Other Pacific Northwest cities have their own heritage tree programs.
The City of Vancouver created its program in 1998, and now lists 19 trees on its register — including an apple tree dating back to 1826. Trees added to Vancouver’s register must be in good condition and have the consent of the property owner. Nominations are reviewed twice per year.
The City of Seattle created a heritage tree program in 1996. Today, its register includes 59 trees.
Tacoma, however, doesn’t have such a register.
“It seems like [Tacoma] is old enough now,” comments Pierce. “Why don’t we have this? Other people have requested a similar program, so I know there is interest.”
When Pierce arrived at City Hall as an intern last spring, she quickly noticed the code was outdated.
“Parts of the ordinance haven’t been updated since 1927,” she says. “Other parts haven’t been updated since 1960 and 1990. Basically, the ordinance is incredibly old and out of date with current urban forestry standards.”
During her internship, she researched the issue, and even wrote a draft version of a revised ordinance that touched on all aspects of the code — not just heritage trees. When she was hired full-time earlier this month, that work continued full-steam. A committee comprised of residents, landscape architects, tree care companies, realtors, as well as members of the Master Builders Association, Tacoma Public Utilities, the city’s community and economic development department, and code enforcement has met twice to discuss the ordinance revision. She hopes a proposed ordinance revision could be reviewed by City Council as early as January.
Still, Pierce adds, it’s too early to know what a heritage tree register would look like.
Would historic tree nominations go through the city’s landmarks preservation commission? Or would there be a separate commission to review nominations? And what would happen to trees that died naturally? Would they be de-listed?
“It’s too early in the process,” she says, adding that she has looked at programs in Seattle, Vancouver, Olympia, and Portland as models.
Tacoma historic preservation officer Reuben McKnight agrees it’s too early to know how the program would function.
“I think we’re just at a real preliminary stage,” he says.
What role would the landmarks commission have in creating and maintaining a heritage tree register?
“I don’t know yet,” he says. “We would probably advise on development of a program. If there was any management of it, we would have to figure it out. It’s very specialized. It depends on what would go with it. Sometimes the designation is completely honorary. It’s sort of a different animal. You can’t manage trees like you manage historic buildings. We probably would have to look at practices of other organizations and cities. Maybe it’s something that comes out of Raime’s office. It may or may not affect any future action involving a tree. It may be a pure recognition piece. All those things are possible. The landmarks commission could potentially be a reviewing body. But we don’t have an arborist [on the commission]. Raime is the City’s expert.”
Recognizing and preserving Tacoma’s old trees is something McKnight says would benefit Tacoma.
“The fact of the matter is that Tacoma has some very spectacular examples of heritage trees,” he adds. “We have many Champion Trees, especially in Wright Park. It’s something that, in the past, I’ve been surprised hasn’t come up before.”
One person who would like to see a register of historic trees is North Slope Historic District resident and preservation activist Marshall McClintock. He has spent hours in the Northwest Room at the Tacoma Public Library searching through archives that document the city’s street beautification projects. He’s also consulted “Champion Trees of Washington State” by Robert Van Pelt to learn more about heritage trees.
McClintock has identified three trees in and around the North Slope that could be added to the register if it’s created:
— A Cedar of Lebanon tree located near the historic Rust Mansion on North I Street. McClintock estimates it was part of the mansion’s original landscaping, and could date back as far as 1905-1910;
— A large Spanish Chestnut tree located on a parking strip near North Sheridan Avenue and North Fifth Street. McClintock estimates it was planted between 1890 and 1910 as part of a street beautification project;
— And the Catalpa tree located near Frisko Freeze. This, too, dates back between 1890 and 1910, according to McClintock.
“These trees are ones that are recognized and people sort of consider them to be iconic,” says McClintock. “People know, ‘Oh, the big Chestnut tree.’ They are aware of it. In fact, I think they would probably want to register more of them. I get a number of calls from people who are upset when large trees are taken down.”
One concern for McClintock is that many of Tacoma’s older trees are located on parking strips between sidewalks and streets — an “ambiguous” area owned by the city, but maintained by individual property owners.
He thinks heritage designations for trees could provide protection in these areas.
“I would like to make sure [these trees] are protected, and they remain as long as they are viable trees,” says McClintock. “Trees, obviously, are living things. They’re not like buildings. They do have a life cycle and they do eventually die. What I would like to avoid is a situation where the city, or a homeowner, basically decides, ‘Oh, we’re just going to get rid of that [tree].’”
Filed under: General, urban-forestry
15 comments
Y You're Welcome August 26, 2008
I think that’s a great idea and I’d love to be part of “Team Tacoma Trees.” I can think of many trees around the city to add to the list.
L LB August 26, 2008
I lived in Walla Walla for a while where there have been battles over beautiful old trees growing near neighborhood sidewalks. Better to be proactive than reactive.
Great story, Todd.
C Chris August 26, 2008
The sooner this is implemented, the better. Our condo association board has resolved to chop down some trees which are disturbing the adjacent sidewalk. These trees create valuable shade over the sidewalk and are a part of the urban fabric of the North Slope.
I have been wondering what the historic district had to say about trees.
J Jesse August 27, 2008
“I would like to make sure [these trees] are protected, and they remain as long as they are viable trees,” says McClintock.
I would be worried about this if I owned an old home in town or a property I’d like to develop. “Protecting” these trees means they can’t be cut down by property owners for any reason. Right? Scary.
E elle August 27, 2008
I’ve dealt first hand with the Olympia program. They have a number of trees on their “historic register.” One of which happens to be the one you can see from I-5 in the Car Toys parking lot. The city made the developer site the building so that it didn’t disturb the giant tree on the corner. (the horticulturalist in me should remember the type of tree)
Tree registers are a fantastic idea. Many programs also aid cities in saving damaged trees
M morgan August 27, 2008
I’m not scared.
Great story Todd. Like many things in Tacoma, its older trees are taken for granted. If Microsoft can build a campus leaving trees in place, I don’t know why others can’t. Besides, if we are going to create an urban forest, we need build on what’s already here.
1 1420 August 27, 2008
Amen Morgan! I like the story too! And, elle, it’s a large coastal redwood (Sequoia sempervirens) next to Car Toys in Olympia. I would like to add that protection never is meant that a tree on such a register couldn’t ever be cut down. It would be ridiculous to assume that a tree that clearly posed a threat to public safety would be required to remain standing due to its presence on a heritage tree list. It could simply mean that certain criteria have to be met in order to remove it (such as an official certified consulting arborist’s report verifying that the tree is unhealthy and unsafe, or that the tree be unhealthy and unsafe to begin with). This could mean that possibly no more heritage trees would be cut down simply because a developer doesn’t want to work around it or because the “sap” (aka honeydew) released in the summer is annoying, etc.
I’m excited!
N NSHDscott August 27, 2008
I recently watched a near-neighbor chop down a huge evergreen at N. 6th and N. K St. That was sad.
I have a giant bigleaf maple on my parking strip at N. 6th and N. L St. (three blocks in from Frisko Freeze). I wonder if a program like this would help me preserve it; would it work that way? Or would it help me remove and replace it if necessary? Or are bigleaf maples not “special” enough to even qualify? I’d love to learn more.
T Thorax O'Tool August 27, 2008
I can (not kidding) see the tree chestnut on Sheridan and the Frisko Freeze Catalpa from my apartment.
It would be a shame to see these stately old citizens be felled for no good reason. What we need is a triad of tree programs rolled into the urban forest thing.
For noteworthy trees, we could have 2 levels of protection: Historical and Prominent.
Obviously, the historical list would be far harder to get on to, and naturally more difficult to chop down.
But the Prominent list could serve as a level of protection for trees that don’t make the Historic list (like NSHDscott’s big leaf maple). The requirements could be far less to get on the list, hopefully encouraging property owners and neighborhoods to add their trees to the list.
While I’m not one to trample on the property rights of the individual, taking down a significant tree can have effects on an entire neighborhood. So the Prominent designation would simply protect the tree from being felled on a whim. It would be easier to get chopping approval than it would be for a Historic tree, but the need for approval alone will serve as some level of protection.
And since I called for a triad, the third part needs to be some kind of tree steward program like they have in Seattle: volunteers (or work-release crews from Purdy/McNeil) work thought the year to care for the trees on city-owned land and right-of-ways, as well as plant new ones.
If we’re gonna build that urban forest, we need to protect what we already have and actually have a cohesive program in place to care for the trees.
C Charlotte C. Valbert August 27, 2008
Great idea, lets not let it die on the vine. A tree at the corner of East K and E.36th street was saved by neighbors years ago, when a new sidewalk was installed. This tree needs to be placed on a prominent designation list for sure. This is an older neighborhood, so perhaps its even a historical tree. Hope someone would check this tree out.
1 1420 August 27, 2008
Thorax, just a quick note- I love the idea of multiple levels for trees to have added protection, but one thing: currently, if a tree is in the right-of-way, approval and a permit is required to remove any trees. People just aren’t aware of that…and in the past it hasn’t been enforced too well. I imagine that permit will stick around through the new code process, but I think enforcement is likely to change. It would benefit all of you if you took a cruise through our current “Tree” code and participated in the new code process (the easiest way is to submit comments via the city’s new urban forestry website- there’s a link to the tree code on there too-“code compliance”). Our code should echo what citizens want…and the only way to do that is to let the city know what we want!
The urban forestry website:
http://cityoftacoma.org/Page.aspx?hid=9219
K Kathy Sutalo August 27, 2008
I can’t believe you left out the state champion weeping American Elm at the corner of N 6th and Yakima. More people have asked about preserving this tree than any other. (Speaking as the former City Urban Forester.)
I’m glad to see so many people finally getting excited about the incredible old trees we have in Tacoma.
D Douglas Tooley August 28, 2008
Though a grand old tree is not as important to the City’s skyline as a downtown building or even a church steeple, they are still worthy of protection.
We definitely don’t need a seperate bureaucracy for this, in fact folding design review, historic preservation and even the planning commission into a single body makes sense.
As to the citizen involvement though we should definitely have a seperate group of folks who are recognized at having a basic knowledge of urban forestry and/or arborism.
Valuing the forest and the individual trees is important. It is curious that an urban forester (not a City Arborist) is calling for the identification of specific trees, but not historically valuable ‘forests’.
It would be good to tweak the historic model a bit to include greenbelts that might not have a single tree of grandeur but might also be worthy of adding to a roster. The McKinley Park and adjoining areas above I-5 come to mind as a particulary valuable part of the Tacoma skyline.
Lastly, identifying spots for the planting of really big trees in the urban environment is difficult. A developer, public or private, who includes same should definitely be recognized and rewarded. One opportunity for same is the Water Ditch trail alignment of South Tacoma.
-Douglas Tooley
Writing at the McKinley Neighborhood CoffeeHouse.
I I'm for Change (for tacoma) August 28, 2008
I was recently in Kansas City for work. I don’t know if they have historic and/or protected trees, but their green spaces are obviously important to them. Here’s a city in the midwest with more trees and greenways than us in the Pac NW. It was wonderful. It seems no one is ever too far from a greenway, park, etc.
Tacoma should be proactive in this area. The nicer looking and nicer living our town, the more people/businesses will want to be here. More people means more dollars to help with better roads, homeless, and other problems we have.
T Thorax O'Tool August 29, 2008
Slogan for 2020:
Tacoma: America’s Greenest City
We can do that both the literal and Al Gore interpretations of the word…